OTTAWA - Prime Minister Justin Trudeau got a first-hand glimpse of the fallout from the SNC-Lavalin affair when he addressed young women staging a mock Parliament in the House of Commons Wednesday: about four dozen of them turned their backs on him while he tried to explain why he had booted Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott out of the Liberal caucus the day before. It was a rough start for Trudeau's efforts to re-establish himself as a feminist and supporter of reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples. "There's always going to be a range of opinions we need to listen to," Trudeau told the women. "But ultimately, diversity ... only works if there is trust and within a team when that trust gets broken, we have to figure out how to move forward." "It's actually easy to stand in a place and cross your arms and stand in a place and say, 'I'm not budging from my position because I'm right,'" he added later. "What is actually more difficult is to look for thoughtful compromise." Some of the women, delegates chosen to represent each of the country's 338 ridings through a program called Daughters of the Vote, were unconvinced. They called him a "fake feminist" and doubted the authenticity of his commitment to reconciling with Indigenous Peoples — sentiments echoed by opposition parties. "It was like a microcosm of the history of Canada, with a white man telling Indigenous women where they can and cannot be and exercising their power and their privilege over them," said Riley Yesno, one of the young women brought to Parliament by Equal Voice, a group dedicated to increasing the presence of women in politics.
I am not interested in any of the EU people who run the thing I believe however in the democratic process of the EU and how they get things done the right way . All political leaders are subject to any amount of corruption. The EU over Brexit has performed respectfully imo Have the U.K. ?
I simply believe in what the EU stands for and am very sad that my country won’t be influencing what is a great thing imo I do not have any belief in the U.K. political system and have been very consistent from the outset I do not believe my country will fair very well without being inside the union I do not have any faith in any current political party in the U.K. and I certainly do not like the Brexit party in any shape or form I state again that the U.K. has lost most of what it stood for and it could take decades to put right I maintain that my country will be worse off outside the EU I do not believe their is any sort of plan ahead post Brexit and we will see a lot of regret when we leave because I have zero faith in the U.K. structure and the divide. I also very much dislike the U.K. culture and much prefer the French way of life which imo is vastly superior in almost every way
Not speaking for Stroller, but for me we would be better off without nations, full stop. Usually I have contempt for gossip, but does anyone know who the identity ‘national multimillionaire figure with a well known family name’ who has had his name redacted in the press today over some pretty horrible sexual assault charges? NDAs all over the place.
That does sound like no borders. I can't see that's in any way practical given the impending diaspora from Africa and parts of the Middle East. The population of the UK is circa 66 million. Would you really be content with it to be 166 million and going upwards, with society becoming suburbanised, where towns blend into one and rural areas lost, with consequent huge damage to the natural environment? Think the multimillionaire's name will come out. Ryan Giggs's attempt at secrecy didn't last long. Looks like the stuff about witholding classified info from Boris when he was Foreign Sec is untrue, manufactured by no.10 to damage him and get Theresa's favourite candidate in. Hunt having Theresa's endorsement is the kiss of death
Not necessarily, although as Stan says the world might well be a better place without the concept of nations. I merely meant that international co-operation is preferable to individual nations seeking to benefit themselves to the possible detriment of others.
We had international cooperation in the Common Market. Why is it necessary to move to creating a centralised federal Europe with flag, anthem, army etc where powers will be taken from national parliaments and be given to leaders in Brussels that are chosen secretly in smoke filled rooms on a patronage basis without a leadership election in sight?
Better to stay in and seek to change the things we don't like, I would say. I don't care for flags or anthems anyway.
That’s all going to happen with or without Nations Goldie, unless a large part of the population in places where life is very hard to unsustainable simply die. And it will be exacerbated by climate change. When Bangladesh (which has made great improvements in living standards recently) is under water it will be interesting to see how many nations stand by and say ‘not our problem, hurry up and drown so we can forget about you’. The way to avoid it is to make life better in the places where people want to leave, and try and do something about climate change (might be too late).
Seems remarkable that when some tuppence ha'penny nonce fantasist led the Police to name and shame various prominent figures and the Police were happy to name various celebrities on the flimsiest of evidence, this individual is granted anonymity because of his 'advanced age, the strain of the proceedings and his bafflement at the allegations'. Money talks...
What we basically need is an EU constitution which establishes, for all time, the exact powers which are best kept at the national level, and those which are best transferred to the supra national one. The constitutions of the USA and Germany both do this - so everyone knows when the central regime is overstepping its powers. Such a constitution would need to have the positive agreement of the majority of the population. We need to establish a concept of what we want the EU to be in future - and how the citizens of Europe can reclaim it - running away is not the solution. The fact is that the World of capital, and finance has long since globalized itself whereas our democracy is still locked at the national level, where it all began - as long as that is the case then international capitalism will become/is the biggest threat to democracy, because national governments are powerless to protect their populations against the ravages of globalized capital.
We need to do something about climate change and overpopulation imo. Otherwise the planet won't be worth living on. That is long term. Dropping borders is a dreamer's Utopia, but wouldn't work in practice. Perhaps in 1000 years time if man is still about then
The impact of climate change is hardly long term anymore. Mid to short term if the stories of huge artic ice melts happening now, but which scientists had forecast a few years back, would take much longer, are true.
What would you do about overpopulation Goldie? There are a set of things which reduce the birth rate 100% of the time.
Some people (not Goldie) will not recognise that climate change is real until their garden is either a lake or a desert.
